Loveland Magazine

LOVELAND MAGAZINE

News and Events from the Loveland, Ohio Area

Without fear or favor

Since 2004

Tag: Lauren Enda

  • Lauren Enda: Setting the Record Straight

    Lauren Enda: Setting the Record Straight

    Response to September 27th City Council Meeting Comments

    A guest column by Lauren Enda

    Loveland resident, Lauren Enda

    At the city council meeting on September 27th, a Loveland resident voiced concern regarding an invasive removal event held at the West Loveland Nature Preserve on September 10th. In her speech, she compared the sanctioned, supported, and fully vetted work done by volunteers with hypothetical residents who may wish to rip out playgrounds and clearcut trees. Examples that she herself said were “outrageous”. After her speech, Loveland’s city officials did not reassure the resident that the city sanctioned the work, that the Nature Preserve was in safe and competent hands throughout the project, and that they were grateful for the work the volunteers had done. They remained silent on all these truths. The mayor seemed to confirm the resident’s concerns by stating, “For all the reasons you mentioned, steps have already been taken and that project has been put back where it belongs, which is Tree and Environment and that will be the only entity that will be taking those steps forward.”

    Anyone listening to the speech and the mayor’s reply might be led to think the speaker’s concern was that the volunteers did something inappropriate or incorrect. No. The speaker in fact stated that the volunteers did a good job removing invasives in the Nature Preserve. The speaker’s concern is that city officials sanctioned this type of project in the first place. She asked later in her speech that the city rethink future projects like this one.

    A quick call to the city manager would have informed her that city officials had already cancelled future projects, not because of the professionalism or work of the volunteers, but because the city solicitor stepped in. From the city solicitor on September 20th, “While the City appreciates the work you performed, please be advised that the City is not willing to allow… non-city contracted entity, to do further work in the West Loveland Nature Preserve.  Any work performed by the City, or on the City’s behalf, must be done through a contracting process that includes certain insurance, liability and other requirements we expect of all contractors.” 

    In the end, by approving the project 53 man-hours of labor jumpstarted the arduous process of removing invasives from Loveland’s green spaces. Fantastic! And that is something we can all be proud of.

    So, if there was a lapse in judgement it was not by the volunteers. What the volunteers did on September 10th was an act of concern and respect for Loveland’s green spaces.

    To clarify things that should have been clarified at the city council meeting on the 27th, below is timeline for the event. This should clear up any remaining concerns about how the event came to be, who was involved, and who gave permission. It shows that insurance and liability issues had been handled. In the timeline are approvals from the Tree and Environment Committee, the City Manager, and the Public Works Director. There is support from Public Works in supplying tools and clearing up the cut debris and from the Marketing and Communications Coordinator for publicity.

    If you are interested in joining future invasive removal days on privately-owned land, please contact me at lauren_enda@hotmail.com. The work continues!

    8 July – After receiving approval from them to remove invasives in the West Loveland Nature Preserve (WLNP), the Tree and Environment Committee sent a waiver so high school students could help in the project

    July – Conducted multiple dates of invasive removal in the WLNP with volunteers and members of the Tree and Environment Committee

    End of July – City Manager approved the project to hire a contractor, at my own expense, to speed the clearing of invasives

    1 August – Contractor insurance document was emailed to City Manager

    15 August – Emailed project details to the City Manager and Public Works Director, indicating that written approval would be necessary to finalize the plans

    19 August – Loveland’s Public Works Director sent email, approving the project, stating that “…this is a great project and really do appreciate your lead in this.”

    21 August – Emailed Tree and Environment Committee about the September 10th date for invasive removal at WLNP

    24 August – Met with invasive removal contractor at WLNP to discuss project

    24 August – Received email from Tree and Environment Committee stating, “We are all working for the betterment of our environment – and that is what matters.  We look at you as a hero in many ways for the way you have researched and pursued issues.”

    30 August – Met with the Reforestation Program Manager at the Ohio River Foundation to discuss project

    30 August – Spoke with the Director of Land Stewardship at the Arc of Appalachia to discuss project

    6 September – After phone conversations with Loveland’s Marketing and Communications Coordinator, sent her event details and she posted them on Loveland’s social media; the post encouraged residents to join the event

    8 September – Contract for work sent to me from contractor. I called City Manager to ask about how to proceed. He said that he does not need to see it or sign it since I am paying the contractor’s bill

    8 September – Loveland Public Works brought work gloves, eye protection, loppers, and the key for the WLNP in preparation for the event

    10 September – Event is held; a huge success with approximately 1000 invasive plants removed, painted with herbicide, and stacked in the manner dictated by Public Works

    12 September – Public Works Department chipped all stacked invasives in the WLNP

    13 September – Marketing and Communications Coordinator posted summary of the event on Loveland’s social media pages

    13 September – As a show of respect for the support and encouragement from Loveland officials, I reported to city council about the event, the outcomes, and thanked the city for their help in making the project possible. The Mayor thanked me for my work stating, “Thank you Mrs. Enda. We appreciate your efforts and that of all the volunteers.” Other city members chimed in with “thanks” as well.

  • Invasive plant removal day: “We also laughed, motivated each other, and shared our passion for restoring our woodland ecosystems.”

    Invasive plant removal day: “We also laughed, motivated each other, and shared our passion for restoring our woodland ecosystems.”

    Strong Coalition Begins Healing at the West Loveland Nature Preserve

    by Lauren Enda

    On Saturday, September 10th, three paid contractors and 13 volunteers spent a total of 53 hours working and sweating in the West Loveland Nature Preserve. Our goal was to remove as many invasive plants in the Preserve as possible, allowing the healing of this delicate ecosystem to begin.

    Invasive plants prevent native plants and trees from growing, but they also undermine the health and vitality of tall, mature trees. As a result of the reduction of healthy native plants, the insect and bird populations are suffering. Unfortunately, in the West Loveland Nature Preserve (WLNP), as in many woodlands in southwest Ohio, invasive plants have started to, or already do, outnumber native ones. The contractor/volunteer team working at the WLNP on the 10th was trying to reverse that ratio. 

    Working together, the team identified the invasive plants, cut them down, applied herbicide to the remaining stalks, and finally stacked them for removal by Loveland’s Public Works. At the end of the workday, we estimated that we had cut down between 900 and 1000 invasives. This seems like a big number, but it represents a very small drop in a very large bucket of invasive plants. There are tens of thousands of invasives left to cut. The vast majority of what we downed was bush honeysuckle, some many decades old and incredibly large. We also cut callery pear, multiflora rose, and privet among others. In the massive tangle of honeysuckle, we uncovered a discarded tire, a mirror, alcohol bottles, and a few dead trees being held up by the honeysuckle that had grown around them. 

    Watch this video of the piles of honeysuckle that were cut and ready for the chipper.

    Prior to the event, experts from several organizations in the field of invasive removal were contacted to ensure that best practices were used. Unfortunately, even with expert guidance, professional technicians, and seasoned volunteers, invasive removal is not a “one and done” task. Continued monitoring of an area to cut invasives that are regrowing will be necessary to ensure the continued healing of the woodland.

    Many individuals helped ensure the success of the day. Many thanks to Loveland’s Public Works Department for logistics support and for taking care of the cut woody debris; to Loveland’s Marketing Team for their help in getting the word out about the event; and to the City Manager for trusting the team to allow us to do the work.  

    Finally, a huge shout-out goes to the twelve volunteers, who spent a beautiful Saturday protecting the WLNP. It was hard, hard work, but we also laughed, motivated each other, and shared our passion for restoring our woodland ecosystems. For those few hours, we were a bonded community with a shared vision. As that community grows, so too will the health of Loveland’s natural spaces.

    Please visit the West Loveland Nature Preserve and observe the transformation. The area we worked is at the West Loveland Avenue entrance, near the intersection with Glen Lake Road. We worked both sides of the trail for approximately 50 yards – though we got further on the side along the creek. You can see the “Hidden” creek from the path now. You can see the forest floor and see the trunks of the trees. Dappled sunshine now reaches the forest floor, something that has not happened in years. Hopefully, this event will be the beginning of the long healing process that the natural spaces in Loveland desperately need.

  • To Councilmember Andy Bateman: Correction and apology

    To Councilmember Andy Bateman: Correction and apology

    by David Miller

    Loveland, Ohio – On Sunday, May 8, Councilman Andy Bateman wrote to Loveland Magazine with dismay he has over our recent story about “Mound” at site of proposed Parking Garage in the Historic District” and asked us for a correction.

    Here is what we wrote in our story: “After (Lauren) Enda and Scovanner gave speeches during the open forum at Monday’s council meeting, there was also no discussion between Council and the City Manager. She said on Monday that she did not hear back from either Kennedy or Bateman after she sent them the report.” (“Questions arise about possible Native America remains and “Mound” at site of proposed Parking Garage in the Historic District”)

    Bateman did however respond on the same day after he received Enda’s initial email, acknowledging he received her email. You can read his response below. He did communicate more fully with Enda the day after the council meeting when Enda expressed disappointment with the communication coming from City Hall.

    We owe Mr. Bateman a correction and an apology. Loveland Magazine did double-check the facts in dispute and we got it partially wrong. He is certainly correct that we should have gone further and checked with him directly. Loveland Magazine did contact City Manager Dave Kennedy before publishing the story and we should have also contacted Mr. Bateman.

    We also thank Mr. Bateman for allowing us the chance to report more accurately.

    Mr. Bateman wrote on Sunday evening:

    Dear David,

    Several people in the community have approached me about an article you wrote recently. The article published on 4/28/2022 is titled; “Questions arise about possible Native America remains and “Mound” at site of proposed Parking Garage in the Historic District”, and within the body of the article there is a claim which I wish to have corrected.

    Citing your article; After Enda and Scovanner gave speeches during the open forum at Monday’s council meeting, there was also no discussion between Council and the City Manager. She said on Monday that she did not hear back from either Kennedy or Bateman after she sent them the report.

    Please see the forwarded email chain which clearly demonstrates a timely response regarding the inquiry.

    Furthermore, both Mr. Kennedy and I provided an email to Ms. Enda regarding our reasoning for not speaking immediately on the issue. Below is the transcript of my email which was sent to Ms. Enda on 4/26, the day after the Council Meeting and two days before your article was published.

    Lauren,

    Following the original email, I consulted with Mr. Kennedy at the HP&P meeting and I also brought this matter to two members of the commission. Both members have had past experiences with archaeological surveys. They each expressed a need for additional information. I agree with Mr. Kennedy that we need to do a fair amount of work behind-the-scenes before a topic or issue becomes an official agenda item.

    I know you’re passionate about local issues and I appreciate the commitment to finding more information. Open Forum is the perfect venue for you and other residents to voice your perspectives to council on any topic, particularly those not on the meeting agenda. However, I am not in favor of council members using this section in the agenda for engaging in an open dialogue. Other council members may opt to use this section as a means for back-and-forth. but I don’t believe that is its purpose.

    As the garage is in the Historic District, I assure you that this information would be discussed whenever an application would be before the commission for work to be performed on this site. 

    This topic may come up sooner; but it should be thoughtfully researched so that the discussion is based on data pursued by staff and other subject-matter experts.

    Thanks for working with us.

    Andy 

    David, as you can see, I provided timely and reasoned responses to her inquiries as did our city manager. You know me well enough to reach out if you had questions pertaining to this issue, yet you didn’t. I wouldn’t have noticed this had your readers not contacted me asking why I didn’t respond to and/or forward the email. I hope these emails show a different picture. Whether you choose to correct the article or provide an update is your decision. But I’m a little disappointed that you published an article which described an alternate version of the events than what actually transpired. 

    Andy Bateman

    Councilmember

    City of Loveland

    Here is the email string Batemand included in his correspondence Sunday evening:

    From: lauren enda <lauren_enda@hotmail.com>

    Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 10:36 PM

    To: Bateman, Andrew <abateman@lovelandoh.gov>

    Subject: Re: Possible “mound” site

    [ EXTERNAL SENDER ] 

    Andy,

    I appreciate you getting back to me. What a crazy thing, eh? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    Take care,

    Lauren

    From: Bateman, Andrew <abateman@lovelandoh.gov>

    Sent: Friday, April 8, 2022 8:50 PM

    To: lauren enda <lauren_enda@hotmail.com>

    Subject: Re: Possible “mound” site

    Lauren,

    Thank you for digging this up. I will certainly let my colleagues on HP&P know about the report and will converse with Mr. Kennedy as well regarding the findings and possible courses of action.

    Hope you’re doing well and enjoying warmer weather (when we are lucky).

    Andy

    Andy Bateman

    Councilmember

    City of Loveland

    From: lauren enda <lauren_enda@hotmail.com>

    Sent: Friday, April 8, 2022 2:05:25 PM

    To: Kennedy, Dave <dkennedy@lovelandoh.gov>; Bateman, Andrew <abateman@lovelandoh.gov>

    Cc: lauren enda <lauren_enda@hotmail.com>

    Subject: Possible “mound” site

    [ EXTERNAL SENDER ] 

    Dave and Andy,

    Attached is the document that I received earlier this week from Beth Sullebarger, a Historical Preservation Consultant. Hamilton County Community Development hired her in 2019 in response to a funding request from Loveland to tear down the two houses where the proposed garage will be built.  In her report, she includes a map from 1849 labeled “mound” and further states that,

    “There is some potential, however, for archeological resources on the property, based on the 1849 plat of Loveland, which identifies it as being the location of a “mound” and owned by W. J. Ballard. The 1870 map shows the property as owned by “T. T. Heath,” who was a Union General in the 5 th Regiment, Ohio Cavalry, during the Civil War and an attorney. See maps below. (Neither of these maps shows a dwelling in the current location, nor does the 1891 atlas.) It is not known whether the “mound” remains or is an Indian mound, but it is possible. The area appears topographically similar to other areas with Indian mounds. Locations on a bluff or hill overlooking a flat river or creek bottom always have high probability for prehistoric sites of all time periods. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office regarding the need for an archeological survey is recommended prior to new construction if a federal permit or funding is involved.”

    Andy – I have already spoken to Dave on the phone about this and am sending to you as a member of the Historical Preservation and Planning Commission. Please share with the other members as I do not have their addresses. 

    I will answer any questions you may have for me.

    Lauren

  • Video interview with Lauren Enda and Sharon Scovanner after they defeat the Grailville rezoning

    Video interview with Lauren Enda and Sharon Scovanner after they defeat the Grailville rezoning

    David Miller

    by David Miller

    Loveland, Ohio – Lauren Enda called it a “landmark” decision and Sharon Scovanner said she was “overwhelmed” by the support they received.

    Last Wednesday, before a standing-room-only crowd, the request to rezone the Grailville property was denied by a 3-1 vote of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Drees Homes had requested the land become a Special Planning District which would have allowed 209 homes on the site.

    After many months of leading the effort, residents Lauren Enda and Sharon Scovanner were breathing sighs of relief. The Commission rejected the proposed development of the Grailville site by the Drees Company which included 74 patio homes and 135 traditional-style homes totaling 209 lots. The land is situated between O’Bannonville Road and State Route 48 in Clermont County. The site is approximately 111 acres.

    Enda and Scovanner also led a protest rally outside City Hall before the multi-hour meeting.

    After the meeting was over, Loveland Magazine asked the two leaders of the movement a few questions about the vote and rezoning in general.

    • What arguments were made by the public that swayed the decision?

    • Resident Dave Stanton presented an economic analysis tonight of the cost to taxpayers of the Drees’ proposal. Please comment.

    • What about the fact that our current zoning code essentially lets developers write the code and map changes they want?

    • Should residents vote at the ballot box for Planning and Zoning Commission Members?

    • Should all zoning text and map changes be put on the ballot for voters to decide?

    The Drees Company representative at the meeting declined to be interviewed.

    These photos were taken during the protest rally and during the meeting.

    (© David Miller/Loveland Magazine 2022)

    Commissioner Andy Bateman made the motion to not forward the plan to City Council. 

    Commission Chair Mark Redmond, and members Brian O’Neill and Bateman voted “YES”. Al Kressler was the lone “NO” vote.

    Commissioner Michael Kady did not attend the meeting.

    If you appreciate reading news like this from Loveland Magazine, please consider sending us some New$ TIP$

  • Questions arise about possible Native American remains and “Mound” at site of proposed Parking Garage in the Historic District

    Questions arise about possible Native American remains and “Mound” at site of proposed Parking Garage in the Historic District

    *Please read this CORRECTION to this story.

    The hillside in Loveland’s downtown where a highly contested proposed parking garage may be built

    “It is not known whether the ‘mound’ remains or is an Indian mound, but it is possible.” – Hamilton County Community Development

    David Miller is the Publisher and Editor of Loveland Magazine

    by David Miller

    Loveland, Ohio – The possibility of Native Americans’ remains under the site of a proposed parking garage on a hill in “Historic Downtown” may give a new connotation beyond the history of White settlers and developers of the area.

    At Monday’s City Council meeting, both Lauren Enda and Tom Scovanner reported that they have come into possession of a 2019 report by a preservation consultant that was commissioned by Hamilton County. The report says there is some potential for “archaeological resources” on the property. The report was based on an 1848 map of Loveland. The consultant said the map identifies a “mound” at the location. The report was commissioned because Loveland was seeking federal dollars to demolish two houses on the site and the money Loveland was seeking, was ultimately federal dollars. According to Enda and Scovanner, the report concluded that there was no historical significance to the houses so the City was given a green light to proceed with removing them.

    However, after the houses were removed, the City proceeded to do excavation on the hillside to make a temporary overflow parking lot to mitigate parking congestion in “Historic” downtown apparently without the knowledge of the reported mound that may contain the remains of American Indians who once lived on the bank of O’Bannon Creek which abuts the hillside. O’Bannon Creek enters the Little Miami River a few hundred feet downstream.

    The proposed garage site is 213 North Second Street (Parcel 200602.029).

    Enda says that as soon as she received the report she immediately put in a call to City Manager Dave Kennedy who could not be reached. She then sent the report to both Kennedy and Councilmember Andy Bateman on April 8. She sent it to Bateman because he is the council’s representative on the City Historical Preservation and Planning Commission (HPPC). Bateman is a sitting member of the Commission.

    Enda’s presumption was that Bateman would forward the report to all of the HPPC members, however, the report was not brought up or discussed at their next meeting. She had asked Bateman in an email, “Please share with the other members as I do not have their addresses.” She said on Monday that she was surprised that it was not discussed at the HPPC meeting.

    After Enda and Scovanner gave speeches during the open forum at Monday’s council meeting, there was also no discussion between Council and the City Manager. She said on Monday that she did not hear back from either Kennedy or Bateman after she sent them the report. *

    City Manager Kennedy told Loveland Magazine via email that he first knew of the report when Enda sent it to him on April 8 at 2 PM. He said that subsequently, the Ohio Historic Preservation Office contacted him and they are scheduling a time to discuss the matter.

    The Hamilton County Community Development Historic Preservation Review worksheet says, “It is not known whether the ‘mound’ remains or is an Indian mound, but it is possible. The area appears topographically similar to other areas with Indian mounds. Locations on a bluff or hill overlooking a flat river or creek bottom always have high probability for prehistoric sites of all time periods.” It concludes, “The property is not considered eligible for historic architecture for the purpose of demolition, but consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office regarding the need for an archeological survey is recommended if a federal permit or funding is involved for new construction.”

    Enda said at the council meeting that according to Loveland’s Director of Finance, Mark Medlar, Loveland taxpayers have already spent $980,000 on purchasing the site, demolition, and design engineering for the “multi-million dollar” proposed garage.

    Enda wants Council to commission an archaeological survey of the property which she says is the recommendation of the Ohio History Connection. The Ohio History Connection was formerly the Ohio Historical Society and carries out history services for Ohio and its citizens focused on preserving and sharing the state’s history. This includes housing the state historic preservation office, the official state archives, local history office and managing more than 50 sites and museums across Ohio.

    Enda was contacted by the Greater Cincinnati Native American Coalition, who in turn have reached out to other Native American organizations such as the National Congress of the American Indians in Washington, DC. During the council meeting, Scovanner read a letter from the Cincinnati organization.

    Enda has advocated for months for residents to be given the chance to vote the proposed parking garage up or down at the ballot box.

    She says that if there are Indian remains at the site they should be treated with respect and dignity.

  • [W/Video] Rally at City Hall informs and asks questions about proposed parking garage

    [W/Video] Rally at City Hall informs and asks questions about proposed parking garage

    by David Miller

    Loveland, Ohio – An estimated 16 people gathered in front of Loveland’s City Hall at 1 PM on Saturday and spread out through the streets of the Historic District and along the Loveland Bike Trail. They were gathering signatures on a petition and in general educating the public about their concerns about a parking garage that is proposed for the Historic District. They expressed that they want to preserve the existing character and ambiance of the downtown area and the Loveland Bike Trail. Opinions were also expressed about protecting the Little Miami River watershed, including O’Bannon Creek that enters the Little Miami in downtown.

    Those who rallied Saturday are questioning the cost of the proposed garage, the need for studies such as an environmental impact study, parking research, and even the need for a garage. They want “data” about what they say is the costliest municipal project in the history of the City.

    Organizer, Lauren Enda told Loveland Magazine on Monday that she obtained 75 new signatures on a petition adding to the 129 signatures she has gathered from an online petition she created.

    Those who gathered are asking the city council to engage with the public before building a parking garage in historic downtown Loveland and ultimately having the question put on the ballot so residents could vote it up or down.

    Loveland Magazine sent an email to all council members and City Manager Dave Kennedy on Sunday morning seeking comment on the rally. Only Councilmembers Tim Butler and Kip Ping responded. You can read the full text of their responses below.

    Enda said on Monday, “We are not saying, ‘no garage’ only that the proposal should be studied from many angles, and then letting residents vote.”

    Tim Butler response:

    I support the right of the citizens of Loveland under the First Amendment to peacefully assemble and express their position about an important issue such as the proposed Parking Garage. I respect their passion for the City of Loveland. I also support many of their specific points and oppose the construction of the Parking Garage. I urge my fellow Members of City Council to listen to the citizens of Loveland and carefully, completely and thoughtfully address our citizens’ concerns before moving forward any further with this project. 

I believe the referendum process should be used sparingly. However, with the intense feelings on both sides of the issue and the potential impact of the construction of this project, a referendum to gauge the public’s support or opposition to this project, before Council authorizes construction and our taxpayers are responsible for subsidizing and paying off the Garage for a generation, is appropriate.

    Kip Ping response:

    This issue cannot be looked at simply as an “are you for it or against it” sort of issue.  There are too many facets to make it that simplistic since a few tweaks one way or another could shift opinions.  As opponents have stated, there are considerations to be made with regard to cost and environmental impacts.  Proponents would note considerations with regard to supporting downtown patrons, helping traffic congestion (i.e. those circling looking for parking), and making it possible for local businesses to have parking reasonably close to their establishments.  All of these are worthy of due consideration.

Council is listening to those that have varied views on the parking garage.  We have heard in open forum from a few people that have come both in favor of and opposed to the parking garage. 

Walking neighborhoods last fall during the election champaign I had an opportunity to hear from many residents, the majority of whom either didn’t have interest in the downtown parking issue or asked why the garage had not been started yet.  The Sierra Club and CROW both reached out to council members via email, and I responded to each with the intent of promoting dialog with them on their concerns.    

Council is working toward improving the parking and traffic issues downtown and is not deaf to the opinions that have been shared and will be shared at future opportunities.  As already written, it is a multi-faceted issue which calls for a balanced and best solution – the project needs to be fiscally sound, environmentally respectful, aesthetic, etc.  There will, no doubt, be some that will be unhappy with the final resolution (perhaps even on both sides of the issue), but that is obviously the unfortunate necessity when there are honest differences of opinion on any issue.
  • Rally this Saturday at City Hall to ask for public engagement on proposed parking garage

    Rally this Saturday at City Hall to ask for public engagement on proposed parking garage

    “Make Your Voice Heard About the Garage Proposal“

    by Lauren Enda

    Everyone is invited to a rally this Saturday, February 19 at 1 PM in front of Loveland City Hall. Members of the community are asking the city council to engage with the public before building a parking garage in historic downtown Loveland. There are too many unanswered questions surrounding the garage proposal.

    Before spending millions of taxpayer dollars, council should: 

    1. Determine the exact need 

    2. Look at less expensive options – cost to build, maintain and enforce 

    3. Look at the environmental consequences – water runoff, noise, light, and air pollution 

    4. Address other priorities of the city, like traffic and the antiquated water systems that won’t be addressed because of this spending 

    5. Balance parking issues with how the massive size (about the size of a football playing field) will detract from Loveland’s charm 

    6. Let the citizens vote by referendum if council decides to move ahead

    Join us on Saturday if you believe the citizens of Loveland should have answers to these questions before moving forward. Sign the petition at the link below to let your voice be heard.

    Petition · Stop the Loveland Garage · Change.org


    by Lauren Enda,

    Lauren Enda lives in Loveland at Hidden Creek

  • Council Continues to Choose the Most Expensive and Damaging Option for Parking, Ignoring Other Options – with No Explanation Why

    Council Continues to Choose the Most Expensive and Damaging Option for Parking, Ignoring Other Options – with No Explanation Why

    Make your voice heard about this issue using petition link below

    by Lauren Enda,

    For the last several months, I have been speaking at council about the need for more conversation, study, and transparency about the parking garage proposal. Loveland needs to do something about the parking issue, that much we can all agree upon. The proposed garage is one of many, many options available to Loveland. Every other option is less expensive, less permanent, less damaging to the environment and less jarring to the landscape. And every other option would enhance, rather than detract from, Loveland’s brand as a quaint and historic area.

    Here is a high-level overview of just one option that would be free to Loveland taxpayers, drastically cut down summer traffic levels in Loveland, provide Loveland businesses even more customers and clients, and maintain our natural, peaceful downtown landscape. The Miami Riverview Park is approximately one mile away from Loveland and it sits on the bike trail. There are hundreds of spaces available – all free of charge. Loveland could mount a marketing and communication plan, teaming with Miami Township, to divert cyclists and walkers coming from 275 to park there and then ride or walk into Loveland – which on a bike takes about a minute. Cyclists or walkers from the east or Route 48 could park there as well without entering Loveland’s downtown area at all. 

    To get the word out about the parking alternative, we could post temporary signs on the trail directing people to Miami Riverview next time they are in Loveland – we could even include a QR code with a map directing them. We could make up information cards to put on windshields and for businesses to give to their customers. Loveland has a Marketing and Communications Coordinator on staff who could design more ways to get the word out about this idea. If cyclists parked at Miami Riverview, it would free up dozens, if not hundreds, of parking spaces downtown for Loveland residents, and reduce traffic. Miami Riverview is just one option of many. And it is free, easy, available now, with no construction, no environmental damage, and no controversy. Let’s pursue this option first.

    A parking committee could outline further options, weighing cost, return on investment, environmental damage, number of spaces, etc… Residents would be happy to talk through more options with members of council at any time. We do not have to choose the most expensive option. In fact, why would we choose the most expensive option? Choosing to spend millions of dollars unnecessarily shows a lack of respect for taxpayers and their money. Council needs to explain their course of action when other options are available. Let’s spend our precious dollars on other higher priority issues – our aging water system, traffic issues, or sorting out the Chestnut property. There are plenty of priorities to choose from that would benefit everyone.

    “I chose Loveland as my retirement home. A large part of my decision to move here was the bike trail and the downtown area and I am determined to protect that. I will fight to protect it.”

    Lauren Enda

    To make speeches and write articles takes a lot of work – and a lot of courage.  Partnering with and learning from a wide variety of individuals and organizations helps to learn about the garage and its detrimental impacts. Two of those organizations spoke at City Council on February 8th – the Sierra Club and the Citizens for Rights of the Ohio River Watershed. Both organizations acknowledge that parking must be addressed but saying the issue must be fully studied and the Council must give residents the ability to vote on a parking garage. Contacting Ohio’s Environmental Protection Agency, The Ohio Department of Natural Resources, multiple elected officials, and The Economic Development Administration has also widened my knowledge of the issue. 

    I chose Loveland as my retirement home. A large part of my decision to move here was the bike trail and the downtown area and I am determined to protect that. I will fight to protect it. I want Loveland to succeed. I want Loveland businesses to succeed. I want visitors to enjoy my town as much as I do. And I want everyone to have a place to park. Together, let’s find ways to provide that parking using a rational, systematic approach. 

    If you want to show your support for a more reasoned approach to the parking issues in Loveland, sign this petition. Council needs to hear from us that we want more data on the parking issue. Thank you.

    Petition · Stop the Loveland Garage · Change.org

    Lauren Enda lives in Loveland at Hidden Creek.

    >

  • Let Loveland Heal – Create a Referendum for the Garage

    Let Loveland Heal – Create a Referendum for the Garage

    by Lauren Enda

    Loveland is a vibrant, bustling, and prosperous city. Which is why the question of increased parking space is an issue. People come to Loveland to live and visit because it is quaint and unique. Another asset that Loveland enjoys is an educated, engaged, and energized resident population. This is an asset that many towns would covet and that could be used to great advantage. Sadly, however, the mayor’s council continues to deny residents a vote on the parking garage, keeping them from actively participating in their own city. Instead of seeking a clear mandate through referendum to go forward with the plan, the council claims that all decisions, regardless of impact and cost, belong squarely with them. This lack of respect for residents’ role in Loveland’s future causes controversy and encourages mistrust of authority. A referendum would take away the controversy completely – the voters would have their say and all questions about the soundness of a garage and discord between residents on either side of the issue would simply dissolve.

    The council could easily calm this discord and start to heal the damage caused by the garage proposal. By creating a referendum for the garage, the council sends a clear, strong, unequivocal message that they care what voters think; that they listen to the will of the people; that they trust the residents to make wise, thoughtful decisions. There is a bonus to the referendum for newly elected council members. By voting in favor of the referendum, the new members would prove beyond doubt that they are living up to their campaign promises to listen to residents.

    Whether in favor of the garage or opposed to the garage, every resident in Loveland should have a voice in this momentous decision. And Loveland residents should not have to force the council into the referendum by collecting signatures. The path of pitting residents against council by collecting signatures to force a referendum is beneath Loveland city council and its constituency. This would only cause further distrust and anger among residents, which is not in Loveland’s best interest.

    According to Councilmember Bateman’s statement on 23 November 2021, democratic principles are alive and well in Loveland. This comment was seconded by Mayor Bailey. A referendum is your chance to prove it. Create a referendum and let democracy take its course. There is literally nothing to lose and everything to gain.

    Almost everyone agrees that the parking situation in Loveland needs attention. Let’s create a parking committee. Loveland has almost 20 committees and not one of them is tasked with parking. Let’s invite residents to investigate options and alternatives that will be cheaper, more flexible, and less intrusive. Let’s work together to gather data, define the problem, and come up with a range of solutions that can be openly discussed and debated. Working on this project could bring people together instead of causing strife.

    Myriad solutions are possible: institute valet parking; purchase an old-fashioned retro shuttle to get visitors to locations in downtown; increase use of Nature Preserve parking; use Loveland’s beautiful parks for events and gatherings instead of having every event in the downtown area. All of these could be accomplished for a fraction of what the garage would cost and keep our town quaint and unique. Each of these solutions would also greatly reduce traffic into the downtown area. Let’s take a breath, think outside the “parking garage” box, and have a conversation. Let’s work together to get it right.

    The decision on whether to build the proposed garage is too important to get wrong. And it isn’t important enough to tear the city apart.

    Do the right thing. Heal the conflict. Put the garage on a referendum.

    Lauren Enda lives in Loveland at Hidden Creek

  • To the Mayor and City Council: 
Why Can’t We Vote?

    To the Mayor and City Council: 
Why Can’t We Vote?

    The proposed parking garage for Historic Downtown as envisioned by City Hall.

    “A man without a vote is a man without protection.”

    Lyndon B. Johnson

    by Lauren Enda

    I retired here from the National Security Agency after 30 years of playing my part to protect the United States. I did not expect to continue that role in retirement, but in my opinion, democratic principles in Loveland are in trouble, especially with the proposed parking garage in Historic Downtown. The Mayor is on record denying residents the right to vote on whether to build the garage. I will not stay silent when this and other examples of abuse of power in my own city are happening. Below, I outline examples.

    In recent weeks, we have heard evidence about the mayor’s record of stifling free speech – both of ordinary citizens and of council members. Also, a Loveland resident captured a photo of a campaigner for the Mayor’s “endorsed block” who was removing campaign signs of their opponent on Election Day. Removing campaign signs subverts open, free and fair elections. Who authorized this tactic? Every Loveland resident should be concerned that this type of anti-democratic behavior is happening here. This behavior does not uphold democratic principles. These are two examples of democracy in trouble, but I will focus now on the garage. 

    Building a multi-story level parking garage in Loveland is very controversial. Many Loveland residents do not want it. The only official feedback we have about the garage is the recent election. Only one council member indicated he was opposed to the garage. And he won the most votes. The message is clear. Loveland voted against the garage. If the Mayor and the newly appointed Council go forward with the garage, they do so against the will of the people. 

    But does the will of the people matter in Loveland? Mayor Bailey clearly does not think so. During a council meeting on 11 February 2020, the mayor said, “Residents will not be voting on the garage.” When asked WHY residents were not allowed to vote, the mayor responded, “You vote on your elected officials and those are the decisions we have been elected to make.” The Mayor would like for residents to become mute after an election, however, an election does not provide the winning party free rein with taxpayer money. An election does not give the winning party carte blanche to permanently disfigure a town without the clear support of the people. An election does not give anyone a green light to plan a large, controversial project in virtual secrecy. 

    Below is video of resident Karen Hawkins asking the Council, and specifically, Mayor Kathy Bailey, about the inevitably of the parking garage being built in Historic Downtown Loveland and if the public will be allowed to vote on its construction.:

    Elected officials should uphold the will of the people. They should give citizens a voice, not deny their voice. Residents are not mute once they leave the polling booth. Quite the contrary. Loveland citizens should retain a voice in what is decided here – especially on the largest capital expenditure in the history of Loveland.

    The proposed parking garage for Historic Downtown as envisioned by City Hall.

    Protection from abuse of power at the federal level is enshrined in the Constitution by checks and balances between the executive, legislative and judicial branches. What safeguards against abuse of power does Loveland have?  Where are our checks and balances? How does Loveland’s electorate ensure our voices are heard? 

    Luckily, there is precedence that the council could use to uphold democratic principles – Council could determine the will of the people by submitting the garage to a vote. In 2007, Loveland was faced with a similar decision – whether or not to build a YMCA. Since it was an expensive project with strong opposing views, the council wanted citizen input and put in on a referendum. The voters went to the polls and voted the project down. Other municipalities have put similar proposals to a vote. This is how democracy can work when a Council respects the electorate and allows them a vote. Why is our Council not providing us the same opportunity?

    My recommendation to the new Council who support the garage is to let Loveland vote on it. The recent election suggests the public doesn’t want the garage. The burden lies with Council to convince the public that this project is in the best interests of the city and the taxpayers. Once appropriate data is gathered and shared with the public on why it is necessary and how much it will cost, then let us vote. Ignoring voter input from the recent election and restricting voter input for the next election is certainly not democratic. 

    It is not too late for the Council to make this right. Loveland goes to the polls again on May 3rd. To the new Council, this is your chance to show that you are listening to us, not developers or outside interests. Your responsibility to listen to the voters does not end once the election is over. That is when your responsibility begins. Let us vote.